Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

In dealing with the heads of the Bill it is most unfortunate that the Minister has not remained for questions on these matters. I wish to ask a number of questions nonetheless. As regards the five obligations of the State, as laid out in the expert group's report, could Dr. Holohan give us his view as to whether this draft legislation fulfils these obligations? I am speaking of each of the five as laid out in the expert group's report. Does Dr. Holohan believe that the draft legislation before us fulfils all of those obligations?

As regards head 4 - the risk of loss of life from self-destruction - the requirement is that one obstetrician-gynaecologist must be employed at that location and two psychiatrists, one of whom shall be attached to an institution where such a procedure is carried out. What is the situation concerning the lead? Who is the lead person concerning that combination of expertise - that is, the obstetrician-gynaecologist and psychiatrists?

It must have some structure. What is Dr. Holohan's understanding of the lead practitioner in that regard and what is the situation regarding conscientious objection which may present regarding one or other of the psychiatrists, and particularly where the requirement is that one of the psychiatrists would be attached to an institution where such a procedure is carried out?

Regarding the certification where a non-emergency situation - a medical condition - would arise, the requirement is that two medical practitioners can certify. One must be an obstetrician-gynaecologist, another could be, as the legislation provides, a psychiatrist. It also provides for others with "specialist division" registration. What other areas of specialist division expertise would Dr. Holohan envisage? There is a significant list there. Depending on what circumstances might they apply?

With three minutes it is very difficult; my time is almost up. I suggest that in head 2, "Risk of loss of life from physical illness", it may be a requirement to revisit the words "an", "a" and "that" in the construction of the provisions. It is open to a number of interpretations as to the requirement of the obstetrician-gynaecologist being attached to an appropriate location. It goes on to say "that location" and "a location". It is open to interpretation as to exactly what is being required. This process is to try to inform how to better prepare the legislation so that it is fit for purpose.